| Pages:
1
..
9
10
11
12
13
..
35 |
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Lee
I've stayed out of this fray but now wonder why anyone here needs to ARGUE and DEBATE religion or politics ANY FURTHER?
What is wrong with all of you?
Isn't there a forum somewhere where you can espouse your silliness?
Politics and religion go hand in hand: both corrupt and misguided and meant to fool the masses -- who are obviously easily fooled.
IF any of you nomads NEED to discuss either religion or politics, take it to OT or somewhere else.
Otherwise, carry on.
That is all.
And remember, HAVE FUN! Don't be so serious! |
| Quote: | Originally posted by Lee
I've stayed out of this fray but now wonder why anyone here needs to ARGUE and DEBATE religion or politics ANY FURTHER?
What is wrong with all of you?
Isn't there a forum somewhere where you can espouse your silliness?
Politics and religion go hand in hand: both corrupt and misguided and meant to fool the masses -- who are obviously easily fooled.
IF any of you nomads NEED to discuss either religion or politics, take it to OT or somewhere else.
Otherwise, carry on.
That is all.
And remember, HAVE FUN! Don't be so serious! |
Wow, you read the whole thing!! Here on Nomads!! and you read the whole thing?! Hmmm, wonder why? You do seem to have a perspective on the matter and
state it in a, might I say, forthrightly! The subject must be important to you as well as others given that this thread has over 6,000 hits. I have
found this discussion enlightening, informative, civil and FUN! Thanks for sharing your perspective, one I am certain is shared by many of the over
12,000 eyes that have viewed this thread.
Iflyfish
|
|
|
Ken Bondy
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3326
Registered: 12-13-2002
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mellow
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Iflyfish
| Quote: | Originally posted by Osprey
OMG. Thanx flyguy |
What!!?? A religious experience Osprey? Or was the OMG simply an expression of some orgasmic experience you were having at the time. I have found
myself uttering exactly the same phrase at times of mostly shared bliss, or at least when I was led to believe they were shared. How was it for you?
Your welcome, it was ok for me.
Iflyfishshakingmyheadsometimes |
I think we should all be using OMZ (Oh My Zeus) instead of OMG. Part of my reason for that is that the abrahamic god is too bogged down influencing
football games and reality shows, in addition to sorting through millions of mumbled prayers every day. We can ease his workload by worshipping some
of the other gods, even though that violates the first commandment 
carpe diem!
|
|
|
paranewbi
Senior Nomad
Posts: 913
Registered: 4-15-2011
Location: San diego
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Ken Bondy
| Quote: | Originally posted by paranewbi
Hi Ken;
You do quote correctly from the Old Testament. I am glad you have read some. What you may not understand is that God chose the descendants of Abraham
to carry forth the message that came to the whole world on the sacrifice of his son Jesus Christ. The ‘laws’ as quoted by you and much more were in
place to assure to some extent that the carrying forth of the message would meet with some success as the ability of man on his own was very limited,
and actually so if you read of the tribes in the world at that time and how they conducted themselves outside of the intervention of God. (Much as
the world at this time is progressing so ‘beautifully’ and ‘naturally’ now, yahoo! [sarcasm]).
Simply stated; The Jews were chosen to carry the word of God and the subsequent “Good News” that came with the Cross and the release of the burden of
the ‘law’ as per your quotes (‘The vale was torn’). The Jews were not chosen to Salvation and yes some of them are not in heaven. The laws were
there to help the Jews to have a modicum of longevity (wow! Only civilization still here! Even though many have tried to get rid of them). If you
look at Leviticus you will find how to get rid of mold on the walls of your house without getting sick! Thank you God!
This of course is an answer to your quoting a portion of the Bible we as Christians know we are no longer held to (and by the way, yes the
admonishment to carry the laws was valid as you quote from Mathew, but please take note that most quotes out of context are deceptive and you will
find that Christ’s disciples picked grain on the Sabbath and that answer to your context can be found in many places other than the isolation you
choose to quote it as, let’s be sincere here if not in agreement please).
Your opinion is just that as mine is of course just mine. Argument is how reasonable men reason with each other. Proof is how the unreasonable are
reasoned with. Outside of that it is foolishness that causes a dialogue.
I can offer you some references to reason with you by much greater minds than mine if you need it intellectually. U2U me if you are interested.
If not, then I would like to say God Bless you Bajafun777! I hope to meet you one day! |
Thanks paranewbi, but, like other religious people, you state things with certainty that you could not possibly know. If there was any evidence for
what you state absolutely, I would consider it. Lacking evidence for the supernatural, I will take my comfort from the natural world, which is much
more beautiful than any of the religious stories I have heard.
Spare me your blessings and your prayers, but I would enjoy meeting you sometime. We would have a spirited discussion |
Sorry Ken, I neither Blessed you nor did I say that I would pray for you...I would do neither.
I also did not say I would like to meet you. I did offer some reponses with the same referance you used for your quotes and made no claim of
absolution other than to use the same book you used and reasoned as to why the laws you quoted were necessary in the context that they were written
from that same book.
I pray for 'one another' as the Bible states and you are not 'one' or 'another' in the context that directive was given and whom it was given to...not
because I particularly care or don't care for you. An open heart to Jesus is who I would pray for and for Bajafun777 because she/he is 'one' and
'another' from what I can discern in her writting. And I Blessed Bajafun777 for the same reasons. Not you Ken.
I could not give you something you so succcinctly reject. And neither can God.
I know that does not bother you.
|
|
|
DENNIS
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 29510
Registered: 9-2-2006
Location: Punta Banda
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Lee
Isn't there a forum somewhere where you can espouse your silliness?
|
Did you really mean to say this, Lee?? Because you followed it up with this:
| Quote: |
Politics and religion go hand in hand: both corrupt and misguided and meant to fool the masses -- who are obviously easily fooled.
|
Then....you went back to this:
| Quote: |
IF any of you nomads NEED to discuss either religion or politics, take it to OT or somewhere else.
|
Now....I' am confused. Which way do you want things to be? 
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Ken Bondy
| Quote: | Originally posted by Iflyfish
| Quote: | Originally posted by Osprey
OMG. Thanx flyguy |
What!!?? A religious experience Osprey? Or was the OMG simply an expression of some orgasmic experience you were having at the time. I have found
myself uttering exactly the same phrase at times of mostly shared bliss, or at least when I was led to believe they were shared. How was it for you?
Your welcome, it was ok for me.
Iflyfishshakingmyheadsometimes |
I think we should all be using OMZ (Oh My Zeus) instead of OMG. Part of my reason for that is that the abrahamic god is too bogged down influencing
football games and reality shows, in addition to sorting through millions of mumbled prayers every day. We can ease his workload by worshipping some
of the other gods, even though that violates the first commandment
|
I'll try Ken, I will earnestly try, but I fear of distracting with OMZ, OMZ 'cause they might respond with "WTF??!! Shut up and get to it!!" One
could utter OMHG, Oh MY Holy Ghost, but that could freak out others in earshot. What about OMA, don't forget Aphrodite! In the Greek Pantheon of
course the possibilities are endless. Sometimes I guess we could utter OMS, Oh My Sisyphus, which unfortunately could be understood to mean, "hurry up
and get this thing over with". Come to think of it I think I will stay with the tried and true OMG, but to each his/her own deity.
Iflyfishwithbaccusandaphrodite
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by paranewbi
| Quote: | Originally posted by Ken Bondy
| Quote: | Originally posted by paranewbi
Hi Ken;
You do quote correctly from the Old Testament. I am glad you have read some. What you may not understand is that God chose the descendants of Abraham
to carry forth the message that came to the whole world on the sacrifice of his son Jesus Christ. The ‘laws’ as quoted by you and much more were in
place to assure to some extent that the carrying forth of the message would meet with some success as the ability of man on his own was very limited,
and actually so if you read of the tribes in the world at that time and how they conducted themselves outside of the intervention of God. (Much as
the world at this time is progressing so ‘beautifully’ and ‘naturally’ now, yahoo! [sarcasm]).
Simply stated; The Jews were chosen to carry the word of God and the subsequent “Good News” that came with the Cross and the release of the burden of
the ‘law’ as per your quotes (‘The vale was torn’). The Jews were not chosen to Salvation and yes some of them are not in heaven. The laws were
there to help the Jews to have a modicum of longevity (wow! Only civilization still here! Even though many have tried to get rid of them). If you
look at Leviticus you will find how to get rid of mold on the walls of your house without getting sick! Thank you God!
This of course is an answer to your quoting a portion of the Bible we as Christians know we are no longer held to (and by the way, yes the
admonishment to carry the laws was valid as you quote from Mathew, but please take note that most quotes out of context are deceptive and you will
find that Christ’s disciples picked grain on the Sabbath and that answer to your context can be found in many places other than the isolation you
choose to quote it as, let’s be sincere here if not in agreement please).
Your opinion is just that as mine is of course just mine. Argument is how reasonable men reason with each other. Proof is how the unreasonable are
reasoned with. Outside of that it is foolishness that causes a dialogue.
I can offer you some references to reason with you by much greater minds than mine if you need it intellectually. U2U me if you are interested.
If not, then I would like to say God Bless you Bajafun777! I hope to meet you one day! |
Thanks paranewbi, but, like other religious people, you state things with certainty that you could not possibly know. If there was any evidence for
what you state absolutely, I would consider it. Lacking evidence for the supernatural, I will take my comfort from the natural world, which is much
more beautiful than any of the religious stories I have heard.
Spare me your blessings and your prayers, but I would enjoy meeting you sometime. We would have a spirited discussion |
Sorry Ken, I neither Blessed you nor did I say that I would pray for you...I would do neither.
I also did not say I would like to meet you. I did offer some reponses with the same referance you used for your quotes and made no claim of
absolution other than to use the same book you used and reasoned as to why the laws you quoted were necessary in the context that they were written
from that same book.
I pray for 'one another' as the Bible states and you are not 'one' or 'another' in the context that directive was given and whom it was given to...not
because I particularly care or don't care for you. An open heart to Jesus is who I would pray for and for Bajafun777 because she/he is 'one' and
'another' from what I can discern in her writting. And I Blessed Bajafun777 for the same reasons. Not you Ken.
I could not give you something you so succcinctly reject. And neither can God.
I know that does not bother you. |
I am glad you have posted this. This post alludes to the bifurcation, US/THEM, Saved/Unsaved, US/OTHER, I'm OK/Your NOT OK, and is the basis of the
use of religion to justify the damning/extermination of those who are Other. We are all in this together friend.
Iflyfish
|
|
|
Ateo
Elite Nomad
Posts: 5901
Registered: 7-18-2011
Member Is Offline
|
|
This is an example of how your religion is separating you from others. This quote below seems a little passive-aggressive towards Ken if you ask me.
| Quote: | Originally posted by paranewbi
Sorry Ken, I neither Blessed you nor did I say that I would pray for you...I would do neither.
I also did not say I would like to meet you. I did offer some reponses with the same referance you used for your quotes and made no claim of
absolution other than to use the same book you used and reasoned as to why the laws you quoted were necessary in the context that they were written
from that same book.
I pray for 'one another' as the Bible states and you are not 'one' or 'another' in the context that directive was given and whom it was given to...not
because I particularly care or don't care for you. An open heart to Jesus is who I would pray for and for Bajafun777 because she/he is 'one' and
'another' from what I can discern in her writting. And I Blessed Bajafun777 for the same reasons. Not you Ken.
I could not give you something you so succcinctly reject. And neither can God.
I know that does not bother you. |
|
|
|
Ken Bondy
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3326
Registered: 12-13-2002
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mellow
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by paranewbi
Hi Ken;
You do quote correctly from the Old Testament. I am glad you have read some.
Sorry Ken, I neither Blessed you nor did I say that I would pray for you...I would do neither.
I also did not say I would like to meet you. |
Ooops, sorry I offended you paranewbi, and here I thought you wanted to meet me, now upon rereading your post I see you really wanted to meet
Bajafun777 . Silly me.
I don't know whether you were trying to be insulting when you said "I am glad you have read some", but in any event I have in fact read ALL of the
bible. Actually, reading the bible cover to cover when I was a teenager was a major factor in my lifelong atheism (I am 72). I found it to be an
evil, repulsive book. Like Penn Jillette says, "reading the bible is the fast track to atheism". I would still like to meet you, but I guess that
would be too christian for you to choke down
[Edited on 6-10-2012 by Ken Bondy]
carpe diem!
|
|
|
DianaT
Select Nomad
Posts: 10020
Registered: 12-17-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
Secular Science vs. Religious "Science"
OMZ Kansas has become the new Tennessee ---
Sorry, but while I respect everyone's right to believe in whatever religion they choose, if I had children in Kansas I would move.
This morning I read this Gravity is Really Intelligent Falling Controlled by God and Jesus
This may be a bit off the direction of the discussion, but I thought some of you might like reading this.
[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]
|
|
|
Osprey
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3694
Registered: 5-23-2004
Location: Baja Ca. Sur
Member Is Offline
|
|
This whole thread leads us to the thought that words are important. Some very religious people repeat what they think is important to make an
indelible impression on the person they need to convince.
I've done it myself.
A few times, in the company of desireable young women my very first word is Jorge -- I speak clearly and distinctly while I admonish "Darlin' please
remember my name because in about an hour you'll be screaming it over and over."
|
|
|
paranewbi
Senior Nomad
Posts: 913
Registered: 4-15-2011
Location: San diego
Member Is Offline
|
|
The written word is sometimes lacking in the spirit of the context because it is in the eye of the beholder. I have not offered anything I have
written in the spirit of insult, passive, agressive nor in any other context than to have a civil discourse as some would accuse me. I cannot void how
others take it in their view just as how others cannot void how I read their content. But I have not called others names, nor discounted their
beliefs, I have only responded based upon that which can be responded to in the realm of my understanding of what they cited or quoted. I am actually
pleased that Ken has read some, I derive from that it is not in my interest to urge him to read more or read it right. Once again I am glad you have
read some Ken...I could not say all at the time because that was not revealed so I offered what was evident in acknowledgment or your ability to
converse on that level at least.
It would seem disengenous to portray a less than 100% continuity in the presentation of my beliefs and by sticking only to what I believe and have a
level of knowledge in...the Bible, is as genuine as I can be. Christ did not chase those who refused his message and conversed with those who were
receptive. And on the contrary he did not hate them and actually wept over them, but he did not pursue them when they walked away. It is in this same
spirit I bid those who do not wish to hear, and bring no thoughts of harm to them.
I would say Ken that there has been much discovered about the content of the Bible in recent times that tend to lend an intelectual validity to the
content. It was in that frame of which I offered some referances to an intelectual answer to some of those statements posted earlier as to
'supernatural' content. Your age of declared cover to cover reading and your age today seems to have maybe not allowed for the realization of those
scholarly writings that are available today concerning the Bible.
|
|
|
DENNIS
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 29510
Registered: 9-2-2006
Location: Punta Banda
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Ken Bondy
Ooops, sorry I offended you paranewbi, and here I thought you wanted to meet me, now upon rereading your post I see you really wanted to meet
Bajafun777 . Silly me.
|
Thas OK, Ken. I'll meet you.
By the way....did I tell you they tore down the round, frond roofed restaurant between Ensenada and Maneadero? I remember you used to mention that
place.
Does this qualify as a hijack? I sure hope so. All of this nonsense is Skeet's fault....and he doesn't even know it.
|
|
|
paranewbi
Senior Nomad
Posts: 913
Registered: 4-15-2011
Location: San diego
Member Is Offline
|
|
Illyfish.
I am not in anything all together with you.
Please do not tell me what I am.
Yes, I am not afraid to say those words either.
I am not one of you.
The reason I say this is because of the one thing that seperates the God of the Bible from all other 'religions'.
I am forgiven.
|
|
|
Mexitron
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3397
Registered: 9-21-2003
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Member Is Offline
Mood: Happy!
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by DianaT
OMZ Kansas has become the new Tennessee ---
Sorry, but while I respect everyone's right to believe in whatever religion they choose, if I had children in Kansas I would move.
This morning I read this Gravity is Really Intelligent Falling Controlled by God and Jesus
This may be a bit off the direction of the discussion, but I thought some of you might like reading this.
[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT] |
What a beauty of a theory..."intelligent falling"
|
|
|
Ateo
Elite Nomad
Posts: 5901
Registered: 7-18-2011
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by paranewbi
The written word is sometimes lacking in the spirit of the context because it is in the eye of the beholder. I have not offered anything I have
written in the spirit of insult, passive, agressive nor in any other context than to have a civil discourse as some would accuse me. I cannot void how
others take it in their view just as how others cannot void how I read their content. But I have not called others names, nor discounted their
beliefs, I have only responded based upon that which can be responded to in the realm of my understanding of what they cited or quoted. I am actually
pleased that Ken has read some, I derive from that it is not in my interest to urge him to read more or read it right. Once again I am glad you have
read some Ken...I could not say all at the time because that was not revealed so I offered what was evident in acknowledgment or your ability to
converse on that level at least.
It would seem disengenous to portray a less than 100% continuity in the presentation of my beliefs and by sticking only to what I believe and have a
level of knowledge in...the Bible, is as genuine as I can be. Christ did not chase those who refused his message and conversed with those who were
receptive. And on the contrary he did not hate them and actually wept over them, but he did not pursue them when they walked away. It is in this same
spirit I bid those who do not wish to hear, and bring no thoughts of harm to them.
I would say Ken that there has been much discovered about the content of the Bible in recent times that tend to lend an intelectual validity to the
content. It was in that frame of which I offered some referances to an intelectual answer to some of those statements posted earlier as to
'supernatural' content. Your age of declared cover to cover reading and your age today seems to have maybe not allowed for the realization of those
scholarly writings that are available today concerning the Bible. |
Are you saying there are new writings in the last 50 years that'll clear this up? Please let us know what they are. If there was a god don't you
think he'd post an updated bible? I'm not being sarcastic nor am I joking. She could delete the old testament and clear up the contradictions for a
start.
|
|
|
DianaT
Select Nomad
Posts: 10020
Registered: 12-17-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Mexitron
| Quote: | Originally posted by DianaT
OMZ Kansas has become the new Tennessee ---
Sorry, but while I respect everyone's right to believe in whatever religion they choose, if I had children in Kansas I would move.
This morning I read this Gravity is Really Intelligent Falling Controlled by God and Jesus
This may be a bit off the direction of the discussion, but I thought some of you might like reading this.
[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT] |
What a beauty of a theory..."intelligent falling" |
The article left me speechless and that is not easy to do!  
paranewbi --- knowing the truth with a capital T and knowing the one and only correct reading of the bible, simply ends the conversation and the
exchange of thoughts and ideas, IMHO
|
|
|
vandenberg
Elite Nomad
Posts: 5118
Registered: 6-21-2005
Location: Nopolo
Member Is Offline
Mood: mellow
|
|
Always put your hand on the Good Book when in a motel room before you turn on the porn channel. That's why they're there.
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by DianaT
--- Barry, the founders of the US were mostly a part of the liberal religious traditions of the time. They were Diests and children of the
enlightenment ---- they were not the fundamentalist Christians that some like to think they were. Even George Washington, while claiming to be an
Anglican did not take communion.
[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT] |
Diane----------You appear to be assuming things, and projecting thoughts in my mind that don't exist and interpretations of what I wrote that are
incorrect---------I never mentioned "fundamentalist Christians", and have no problems or disagreements with what you wrote above in general------and,
I stand by what I originally wrote. I believe that this Nation was founded ( & settled) on Christian-Judeo principals, defined in it's broadest
sense. You can nit-pick that if you like, but it does not change my conclusions.
Barry
|
|
|
DianaT
Select Nomad
Posts: 10020
Registered: 12-17-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Barry A.
| Quote: | Originally posted by DianaT
--- Barry, the founders of the US were mostly a part of the liberal religious traditions of the time. They were Diests and children of the
enlightenment ---- they were not the fundamentalist Christians that some like to think they were. Even George Washington, while claiming to be an
Anglican did not take communion.
[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT] |
Diane----------You appear to be assuming things, and projecting thoughts in my mind that don't exist and interpretations of what I wrote that are
incorrect---------I never mentioned "fundamentalist Christians", and have no problems or disagreements with what you wrote above in general------and,
I stand by what I originally wrote. I believe that this Nation was founded ( & settled) on Christian-Judeo principals, defined in it's broadest
sense. You can nit-pick that if you like, but it does not change my conclusions.
Barry |
Sorry, I did not mean to indicate that you were referring to fundamentalists --- but too many people today do, and I would argue that this country was
founded far more on Roman and Greek traditions and the philosophies of the Enlightenment with the Judeo-Christian principles a small part as was the
influence of the Iroquois Nation.
[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]
|
|
|
Ken Bondy
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3326
Registered: 12-13-2002
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mellow
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by paranewbi
The written word is sometimes lacking in the spirit of the context because it is in the eye of the beholder. I have not offered anything I have
written in the spirit of insult, passive, agressive nor in any other context than to have a civil discourse as some would accuse me. I cannot void how
others take it in their view just as how others cannot void how I read their content. But I have not called others names, nor discounted their
beliefs, I have only responded based upon that which can be responded to in the realm of my understanding of what they cited or quoted. I am actually
pleased that Ken has read some, I derive from that it is not in my interest to urge him to read more or read it right. Once again I am glad you have
read some Ken...I could not say all at the time because that was not revealed so I offered what was evident in acknowledgment or your ability to
converse on that level at least.
It would seem disengenous to portray a less than 100% continuity in the presentation of my beliefs and by sticking only to what I believe and have a
level of knowledge in...the Bible, is as genuine as I can be. Christ did not chase those who refused his message and conversed with those who were
receptive. And on the contrary he did not hate them and actually wept over them, but he did not pursue them when they walked away. It is in this same
spirit I bid those who do not wish to hear, and bring no thoughts of harm to them.
I would say Ken that there has been much discovered about the content of the Bible in recent times that tend to lend an intelectual validity to the
content. It was in that frame of which I offered some referances to an intelectual answer to some of those statements posted earlier as to
'supernatural' content. Your age of declared cover to cover reading and your age today seems to have maybe not allowed for the realization of those
scholarly writings that are available today concerning the Bible. |
Thanks for your thoughts paranewbi. With all due respect (OMZ I love that phrase, it has so many wonderful nuances), I don't think you are saying
anything. You are simply assuming that the bible is true, and with that premise you move on to "prove" something. There is a phrase for that,
"garbage in, garbage out". The bible is true because it says it is true. Doesn't fly.
As to my understanding of the bible, my bible study didn't end with my first teenage reading more than 50 years ago. I would stack my "bible study"
library up against most trained bible scholars. I must admit that my interests have tended towards the history of the bible, which is absolutely
fascinating. It is astonishing that such a fundamentally evil book, which advocates slavery, genocide, sacrificing numerous small animals, killing
your kids for talking back to you, killing homosexuals, killing people who work on weekends, killing, killing, killing ad nauseum, has had such a
stranglehold on so many people. One thing I learned in my studies of the bible, is that there are thousands of versions in existence. I own four
copies of the "King James" version, and each is different. Some differences are substantial, others editorial. But the fact remains is that nobody
knows what the original version said, it doesn't exist. So much for "written by the creator of the universe."
Please refer me to some writings which will enlighten me on what the bible really means. I will enthusiastically pursue them.
[Edited on 6-10-2012 by Ken Bondy]
carpe diem!
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
..
9
10
11
12
13
..
35 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
